Authors:

Mr. Isaac Acheampong (ikeygh@yahoo.com) and

Mr. Kwabena Asamoah Asiedu (landi145@yahoo.com)

Affiliation:
Accra Polytechnic Marketing Department
Post Office Box GP 561
Accra Ghana
Phone: 02330302662939, 662263
Name of Track: Marketing

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159874

Integrated Marketing Communications:

A customer - focused approach in Marketing Modern
Businesses.

Mr. Isaac Acheampong and Mr. Kwabena Asamoah Asiedu

Abstract
This paper explores the concept of integrating Mark eting Communications
tools by companies as a customer focused means of mark eting their
businesses. The Mark eting communication tools considered include
advertising, sales promotion, public relations, direct mark eting and
internet/interactive
communications.
Previously,
most
companies
concentrated mostly on advertising to communicate to their target
customers and seldom used the other communication tools. Some
companies used other communication tools but on separate basis which is
in contrast to the concept if IMC. This is the premise on which this paper
studied how modern firms use comprehensive integration of mark eting
communications tools which enhances success through synergistic
execution of their mark eting communication programs. Available literature
indicates that an effective IMC program ensures a successful mark eting of
a companys product/service and improves on their brand image as well as
corporate image. This again focuses on finding out whether this could be
proven practically.

Field of Research: Marketing

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159874

1. Introduction
Companies develop communication messages which send out their intended brand and
corporate images. The creation of an Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC)
program helps companies to create single, consistent and unified customer focused
messages using electronic, print and outdoor media. An effective and efficient
execution of an IMC program ensures that the needed awareness of companys
offerings is created. It has been argued that IMC is the foundation of new customerfocused marketing efforts for acquiring, retaining, and growing relationships with
customers and other stakeholders (Duncan and Moriarty, 1998).

(Moriarty et al, 1994) indicate that the shift toward the IMC perspective has been hailed
as one of the most significant changes in the history of advertising and promotion.
(Kitchen et al, 2004) also add that it is the major communications development of the
last decade of the 20th century. In view of this marketing oriented companies work
closely with their agencies to create IMC campaigns as observed by (Belch & Belch,
2004).

2. Literature Review
Various studies point out that, among the various IMC tools, advertising has received
the most attention with respect to its impact on the response process of consumers.
The various communication tools that team up with advertising to form the IMC
campaign are dealt with individually and subsequently the strength they produce for a
company is also looked at. Explanations on these tools are explained further. Much of
the review for this study is sourced from the work of George E. Belch, Professor of
Marketing, San Diego State University and Michael A. Belch, Professor of Marketing,
San Diego State University.

Sales Promotion
While much theorizing and research has been conducted in an attempt to determine the
manner in which advertising impacts the response process of consumers, less attention
has been given to other elements of IMC such as sales promotion, direct marketing,
public relations and the Internet. In practice, consumer-oriented sales promotion
accounts for an equal or even greater amount of the promotional budget than media
advertising (Belch and Belch, 2004). The increasing reliance on sales promotion is, at
least in part, attributable to a greater desire by marketers for measurable and
quantifiable results as well as an increasing emphasis on return on investment (Neslin,
2002).
Mr. Isaac Acheampong, Department of Marketing, Accra Polytechnic, Ghana, Email: ikeygh@yahoo.com
Mr. Kwabena Asamoah
landi145@yahoo.com.

Asiedu,

Department

of Marketing,

Accra Polytechnic,

Ghana,

Email:

Advertising
This is the most visible IMC tool that companies employ in their communication
programs. The dominant conceptualization of how advertising works from an
intermediate to long-term perspective is through the response hierarchy model (Strong,
1925; Lavidge and Steiner, 1961; McGuire 1978.). As noted by (Weilbacher, 2001),
hierarchy-of-effects (HOE) models have been around in the literature of marketing in
one form or another for more than 100 years. Colleys (1961) what became kown by its
acronym as (DAGMAR) which presented an approach to setting and measuring
advertising goals and objectives based on a hierarchical model of response with four
stages: awarenesscomprehensionconviction and action. The DAGMAR text was
revised by Dukta (1995), for further understanding.

Internet and Interactive Communication Effects

Technological advancement has brought about this tool and it has become the fastest
growing and most dynamic areas of IMC. Interactive media allow for a back-and-forth
flow of information whereby users can participate in and modify the form and content of
the information they receive in real time.
Consumers are able to assume an active rather than passive role in the response
process for interactive advertising. (Pavlou and Stewart, 2000) note that the goals of
interactive advertising tend to be similar to the traditional objectives of advertising,
which means that many of the traditional measures of effectiveness remain relevant.
However, they note that interactive media also have some properties that expand the
range of responses that might be used to measure the effectiveness of these
communications as the control of the information flow is shifted from the marketer to the
consumer.

Public Relations/Publicity Effects

The role of public relations as a component of the integrated marketing communications
process has changed significantly. The traditional role of earning public understanding
and respect, while still important, has been supplemented by a more marketing oriented
approach (Kotler and Mindak, 1978). Some public relations academicians have been
critical of the idea of viewing PR as a marketing function and the encroachment of IMC
into this area. (Lauzen, 1991). However, leading practitioners such as (Ries and Ries,
2002) argue that for many companies, public relations is moving toward a new role and
becoming more of a marketing function.

Direct Marketing Effects

Direct marketing has generally been viewed as a promotional tool that is designed to
elicit some type of behavioral response from consumers in the form of purchase,
requests for additional information, or providing a sales lead. As noted by (Duncan,
2005), in direct marketing a response is defined as something said or done in response
to a marketing communication. Direct mail, infomercials, telemarketing, direct response
4

print and broadcast advertising have the same objective which is to generate a
response such as requests for additional information or actual purchase. Thus
measures of effectiveness almost always focus on the behavioral response generated
by the message. Metrics such as cost per response or inquiry, cost per order (CPO),
orders per thousand etc are just a few of the criteria employed to measure short term
effectiveness of direct marketing while measures such as lifetime value of customers
are beginning to be used to assess long term effects as noted by (Nash, 2000).

(Brodowsky and Belch, 2002), indicated that, infomercials generally follow a formulaic
sequence that assumes a learnfeeldo response sequence. Viewers first learn as
they are shown information about the benefits of the product or service. Next, viewers
feelings are evoked through emotional testimonials from those whose lives have
improved by using the product or service. Finally, a direct response appeal encourages
viewers to take action and order the product or service.

Strengths in integrating communication tools.

While numerous studies have been conducted to measure the effectiveness of
individual IMC elements, far less attention has been given to examining the synergistic
effects of multiple marketing communication tools working together, despite the fact that
consumers are likely to receive information from a variety of sources. Indeed, one of the
fundamental ideas behind IMC is that all of a companys marketing and promotional
activities should project a consistent and unified message and image to the consumer.
(Naik and Raman, 2003), wrote that, a central tenet of the IMC approach, which
distinguishes it from the conventional view, is that each medium enhance the
contributions of all other media. This distinction is driven by the potential existence of
synergy, that is, the added value of one medium, as a result of the presence of another
medium, causing the combined effect of media to exceed the sum of their individual
effects.
The problem of ignoring synergistic or interaction effects of the various IMC tools has
been recognized. For example, Weilbacher (2001) argues that hierarchy models of
advertising effects really cannot be validated since they are concerned only with
advertising in the form of discrete brand-centered sponsored and content-controlled
media messages. He adds that in addition to advertising, and, in lesser degree from
brand to brand, the total marketing communications program will also include, public
relations; a broad range of sales price and point-of-purchase promotional activities;
brand websites; direct response marketing; sponsorship programs with athletes or other
celebrities; sponsorship of sporting events and stadia, pop culture events, and classical
cultural events and halls; in-store display and sampling programs; movie and TV show
product placements; and who knows what else?. Weilbacher notes that consumers are
constantly immersed in brand-sponsored communications that differ in significant
degree from content-controlled advertising messages. He concludes that there is a
5

need to think about the effects of advertising and other forms of marketing
communication from an IMC perspective and understand how consumers synthesize
individual IMC inputs into an overall conception of a brand.

3. The Methodology
This study was a survey based, the researchers designed questionnaires which were
administered in order to achieve the objectives set for the study. A total of eleven (11)
reputable companies in Ghana were surveyed. One hundred and ten respondents were
randomly selected to be interviewed. Each respondent was screened to make sure that
they patronize either the selected companys services and /or products.

Each question that was asked generally pertained to all the selected companies. The
researchers first looked at the influence of the individual communication tools on
consumers. Secondly, the impact of the integrated communications programs of the
companies on the purchasing decision making of customers was looked at. As part of
looking at the impact integrating the communication tools, the behavioral tendencies of
the respondents were also studied. The behavioral tendencies were how often
consumers are induced to purchase and repurchase the brands of the companies.

The companies selected are part of the Ghanas club 100 companies. Other factors
considered were their market share, brand image and brand identity. The companies
include three telecommunications companies i.e. Mobile Telecommunication Network
(MTN), Vodafone Ghana Ltd and TiGO Ghana Ltd. Three banks which included
Barclays bank, UT bank and Zenith bank. There were three insurance companies
namely, Vanguard Assurance, State Insurance Corporation (SIC) and Enterprise Life
Assurance Company and two manufacturing companies namely Nestle Ghana ltd and
Coca Cola Bottling Company of Ghana.

The study basically tested the usage and the impact of the IMC model of marketing
communications and its impact on marketing brands and also on corporate
communications. The various findings are interpreted and discussed.

4. Main Findings
This study found out the effects of the individual communication tools of the IMC
program on the consumers of the companies. It again found out the impact of
integrating all the communications tools on the consumers.

Table 1. Influenced by Advertisement

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

70

63.6

63.6

63.6

very
often

26

23.6

23.6

87.3

Dont
Know

8.2

8.2

95.5

Not
Often

3.6

3.6

99.1

Not at
1
all

.9

.9

100.0

Total

100.0

100.0

110

Advertising: This communication tool is very popular. As much as seventy respondents

(63.3%) of respondents said they are often influenced by it. This may be due to the fact
that it is the commonest tool companies use.

Table 2. Influenced by Sales Promotions

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

52

47.3

47.3

47.3

very
often

26

23.6

23.6

70.9

Dont
Know

11

10.0

10.0

80.9

Not
Often

13

11.8

11.8

92.7

Not at
8
all

7.3

7.3

100.0

Total

100.0

100.0

110

Sales Promotions: This IMC tool influenced 52 respondents which represents 47.3%
of the total respondents. Twenty six respondents (23.6%) also indicated they are very
often influenced by it. This indicates that sales promotions as a tool is very influential.

Table 3. Influenced by Internet and Interactive Communications.

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

26

23.6

23.6

23.6

very
often

21

19.1

19.1

42.7

Dont
Know

46

41.8

41.8

84.5

Not
Often

13

11.8

11.8

96.4

Not at
4
all

3.6

3.6

100.0

Total

100.0

100.0

110

Internet: The internet was found not to be very influential on people. Only 26
respondents (23.6%) said they are often influenced by the internet. Majority of the
respondents did not even know the impact of the internet on themselves. This may be
due largely to the phenomenon of computer illiteracy in most African countries.

Table 4. Influenced by Public Relations/ Publicity

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

20

18.2

18.2

18.2

very
often

35

31.8

31.8

50.0

Dont
Know

27

24.5

24.5

74.5

Not
Often

16

14.5

14.5

89.1

Not at
12
all

10.9

10.9

100.0

Total

100.0

100.0

110

Public Relations/Publicity: This tool was also found to be very influential as 35

people (31.8%) indicated they were influenced through it. However, 27 people (24.5)
could not tell whether they are influenced or not. This is significant as PR/Publicity is a
modern trend in marketing communications.

10

Table 5. Influenced by Direct Marketing

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

50

45.5

45.9

45.9

very
often

29

26.4

26.6

72.5

Dont
Know

7.3

7.3

79.8

Not
Often

10

9.1

9.2

89.0

12

10.9

11.0

100.0

Total

109

99.1

100.0

System

.9

110

100.0

Not
all

Missing
Total

at

Direct Marketing: Almost half of the respondents 50 people (45.5%) said they were
often influenced by direct marketing. This may be due to the fact that the customers are
directly communicated to for their response. Again this may be due to the fact that,
there are no intermediaries. Only 12 respondents (10.9%) were not influenced at all and
eight respondents did not know.

11

Table 6. What are your perceptions of Integrated Marketing Communications?

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

Good

44

40.0

40.4

40.4

very
good

57

51.8

52.3

92.7

Dont
know

6.4

6.4

99.1

very
bad

.9

.9

100.0

Total

109

99.1

100.0

Missing System

.9

Total

110

100.0

Valid

Perception of IMC: The respondents were asked of how they perceive the concept of
IMC in marketing communications. As many as 57 people (51.8%) said they have a
very good perception with only 0.9% responding as very bad. This in the view of the
researchers indicates the positive impact of IMC on consumers.

12

Table 7. How often do you recall a communication message?

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

16

14.5

14.7

14.7

very
often

52

47.3

47.7

62.4

Dont
Know

26

23.6

23.9

86.2

Not
Often

11

10.0

10.1

96.3

3.6

3.7

100.0

Total

109

99.1

100.0

System

.9

110

100.0

Not
all

Missing
Total

at

Brand/Communication Recall (Cognitive Effect): This sought to find out how people
could process the IMC process for decision making. As much as 52 people (47.3%) said
very often they recall through the IMC process with only 3.6% saying not at all. This
shows a significant contribution of IMC in modern marketing.

13

Behaviour of Respondents.
The study further found out the behavioral patterns of respondents to the IMC programs
of the companies. The following analyses explain them.

Table 8. How often are you induced into trial of a product based on a companys
IMC program?

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

23

20.9

21.1

21.1

very
often

32

29.1

29.4

50.5

Dont
Know

40

36.4

36.7

87.2

Not
Often

5.5

5.5

92.7

7.3

7.3

100.0

Total

109

99.1

100.0

System

.9

110

100.0

Not
all

Missing
Total

at

Trial: The question sought to find out how respondents were induced to try a
product/service through an IMC program. 23 people (20.9%) said often with 32 people
(29.1%) saying very often they are influence to try a product /service.

14

Table 9. How often are you induced to purchase a product based on a companys
IMC program?

Valid

Missing
Total

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

52

47.3

47.7

47.7

very
often

11

10.0

10.1

57.8

Dont
Know

12

10.9

11.0

68.8

Not
Often

34

30.9

31.2

100.0

Total

109

99.1

100.0

System

.9

110

100.0

Actual Purchase: IMC was able to induce almost half of the respondents 52 people
(47.3%) to make actual purchases. This shows that the IMC program speeds up the
consumer decision behaviour as some people do not even try the product/service but
just go on to buy.

15

Table 10. How often are you induced to repurchase a product based on a
companys IMC program?

Valid

Frequen
cy

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulativ
e Percent

often

24

21.8

22.9

22.9

very
often

26

23.6

24.8

47.6

Dont
Know

49

44.5

46.7

94.3

Not
Often

3.6

3.8

98.1

1.8

1.9

100.0

Total

105

95.5

100.0

System

4.5

110

100.0

Not
all

Missing
Total

at

Repurchase: The number of people who were influenced to repurchase was only 24
(21.8%). A reduction of over 50% from the initial 47.3% who purchased because of the
IMC program. This may be due to a variance in consumers expectations and the actual
perception after using the product or experiencing the service. Companies must
therefore be consistent in fulfilling their promises.

16

5. Conclusion
Generally the individual communication tools that make up the IMC program were found
to be popular among respondents. This may probably be due to the fact that most
companies use them more often. The study further revealed that integrated marketing
communications if really implemented has tremendous impact on a companys ability to
influence their customers behaviour. On the average, about fifty percent of the
respondents indicated that they are induced to purchase and also repurchase a
companys brand.

Brand recall which is an essential aspect of consumer behaviour as well as trying out
products by consumers were also found on the average to have about fifty percentage
response from the respondents. These findings indicate the tremendous impact an
effective IMC will have on the fortunes of a business.

The perception of consumers of an IMC program by a company was also found to be

very good. This augurs well for companies since the extent of conception of their brands
is very high and their brands also easily get into the evoke set of their audience.

Regardless of the tremendous contributions found from the implementation of IMC,

there still persists the problem of measuring its effectiveness. Schultz and Kitchen
(2000) acknowledged this problem by stating that We cant measure IMC now and it
may be some time before it can be. The problem is that many marketing activities cant
be measured and the value of communication effects and impacts are even more
tenuous. However, this problem is curbed by measuring the impact of the IMC process.
It could be measured through brand recall surveys, enquiries made on the
product/service, sales volume etc. It should also be noted that since a variety of
communication tools constitute the IMC process, determining the interactive effects of
all of the tools is an arduous task.

17

References
Baker, William E. and Richard J. Lutz 2000, An Empirical Test of an Updated
Relevance-Accessibility Model of Advertising Effectiveness, Journal of Advertising, 29,
1 (Spring) 1-15.
Belch, George E. and Michael A. Belch 2004 Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated
Marketing Communication Perspective, 5th edition, New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.
Dukta, Solomon 1995, DAGMAR: Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising
Results, 2nd Edition, Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books.
Duncan, Tom 2005 IMC: Using Advertising and Promotion to Build Brands, 2nded, New
York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.
Greenwald, Anthony 1968, Cognitive Learning, Cognitive Response to Persuasion and
Attitude Change, in Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, A.G. Greenwald, T.C.
Brock and T.W. Ostrom (eds) New York: Academic Press.
Joan Meyers-Levy, Prashant Malaviya. 1999, Consumers' Processing of Persuasive
Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories, Journal of
Marketing. (63), 45-61.
Kitchen, Philip J., Joanne Brignell, Tao Li and Graham Sprickett Jones 2004, The
Emergence of IMC: A Theoretical Perspective, Journal of Advertising Research,
(March) 19-30.
Kotler, Philip and William Mindak 1978, Marketing and Public Relations, Journal of
Marketing, 42, 4 (October), 13-20.
Lauzen, Martha M. 1991, Imperialism and Encroachment in Public Relations, Public
Relations Review, 17, (Fall) 245-55.
Lavidge, Robert J. and Gary A. Steiner 1961, A Model for Predictive Measurement of
Advertisement Effectiveness, Journal of Marketing, 25 (October) 59-62.
MacInnis, Deborah J. and Bernard J. Jaworski 1989, Information Processing from
Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Framework, Journal of Marketing, 53 (October),
1-23.
McGuire, William 1978 An Information Processing Model of Advertising Effectiveness,
in Behavioral and Management Science in Marketing, Harry L. Davis and Alvin J. Silk,
eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 156-80.
Moriarty, Sandra E. 1994, PR and IMC: The Benefits of Integration, Public Relations
Quarterly, (Fall), 39 (3), 38-44.

18

Naik, Prasad A. and Kalyan Raman, 2003, Understanding the Impact of Synergy in
Multimedia Comparisons, Journal of Marketing Research, 60 (November), 375-388.
Nash, Edward L, Direct Marketing: Strategy, Planning, Execution, (4th Edition), New
York, McGraw Hill, 2000.
Neslin, Scott A. Sales Promotion, Cambridge MA: Marketing Science Institute, 2002.
Pavlou, Paul A. and David W. Stewart 2000, Measuring the Effects and Effectiveness
of Interactive Advertising: A Research Agenda, Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1,
(1).
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo and David Schumann 1983, Central and
Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,
Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September) 135-46.
Ries, Al and Laura Ries 2002, The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR, New York,
Harper Business
Strong, Edward K. Jr. 1925, Theories of Selling, Journal of Applied Psychology, 9, 7586.
Vakratsas, Demetrius and Tim Ambler 1999 How Advertising Works: What We Really
Know?, Journal of Marketing, 63, (January) 26-43.
Weilbacher, William M. 2001, Does Advertising Cause a Hierarchy of Effects?,
Journal of Advertising Research, 41,6, 19-26.
Wright Peter 1980, Message Evoked Thoughts, Persuasion Research Using Thought
Verbalizations, Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (September) 151-75.

19

Appendix I
The following questions pertain to the companies listed below. Kindly tick the
appropriate box for your response concerning the influence of each of the marketing
communication tools on you.
Often

Very
often

Dont
Know

Not
Often

Not at
All

Very
often

Dont
Know

Not
Often

Not at
All

Influenced by Advertisement
Influenced by Sales Promotions
Influenced by Internet and Interactive
Communications
Influenced by PR/ Publicity
Influenced by Direct Marketing

Appendix II
Often

How often do you recall a communication

message?
How often are you induced into trial of a
product based on a companys IMC
program?
How often are you induced to purchase a
product based on a companys IMC
program?
How often are you induced to repurchase a
product based on a companys IMC
program?

Q. What is your perception of Integrated Marketing Communications?

a. Good

b. V. Good

c. Dont know

d. V. Bad
20